Anjana Sarkar v. State Of West Bengal

24.02.2022 Court No.32 rpan/ 03 C.R.M. (A) 91 of 2022 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed in connection with Bowbazar Police Station / DD Case no.244 of 2020 dated 11.08.2020 under Sections 420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860;

And In re: Anjana Sarkar - Petitioner.

Mr. Suchindram Bhattacharjee ... for the Petitioner.

Mr. Saibal Bapuli, Mr. Arani Bhattacharyya ... for the State.

Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned advocate appearing for the State, upon instruction, submits that the petitioner has complied with the earlier directions contained in the order of this Court dated 28.01.2022 and has cooperated with the investigation. Let the report, as produced, be kept on record. Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an Anganwari worker and is a female member of the family and there is no possibility that she would flee from justice.

Having heard the learned advocates and considering the materials in the case diary, the nature of accusations and as the petitioner has complied with the earlier directions of this Court, we are of the opinion that custodial interrogation is not necessary. As such, her prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed. Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioner, namely, Anjana Sarkar shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of like

amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, with a further condition that she shall continue to cooperate with the investigation and shall not leave the jurisdiction of Park Street Police Station, where she is presently residing, till investigation is complete, save and except for attending her work place and for attending the learned court below on all the dates specified for hearing.

It is further directed that the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence and/or intimidate the witnesses in any manner whatsoever.

In the event the petitioner fails to comply with the aforesaid directions, without any justifiable cause, the learned court below shall be at liberty to cancel her bail, in accordance with law, without further reference to this Court. The application for anticipatory bail, being CRM (A) 91 of 2022, is, thus, disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Sugato Majumdar, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)